Caravan parks first...marinas next??

[Alan de Enfield]

15 minutes ago, Detling said:

then the mooring is not occupied for more than 11 months per year and doesn't need residential planning status.

It is a Grey area but that statement is not actually correct.

28 days seems to be the 'key' number.

 

3.1.2 The need for planning permission for moorings used by vessels or floating structures in residential use
As discussed earlier, various different types of vessels or floating structures may be in residential use; that is, in use as a person’s sole or main residence.
The question that arises is whether the mooring of such a vessel requires planning permission as a material change in the use of land. The point at which the mooring of a residential boat on a waterway departs from an ancillary use of the waterway (which usually would not need planning permission) and moves to a material change to residential use (which usually would need planning permission) needs to be decided on the basis of fact and degree as well as the particular circumstances of a case. The use of the mooring for this purpose is not included in any of the classes prescribed in the Use Classes Order. It is therefore sui generis (not C3 Dwellinghouses).
In this context it is also worth noting that planning permission is usually not required where the residential use of a mooring is for no more than 28 days in any calendar year, since such temporary use is permitted development under Part 4 of the GPDO13.
Furthermore, occasional or extended holiday stays on a vessel may not, as a matter of fact and degree, be considered to amount to a material change of use i.e. to permanent residential use.
A number of examples will illustrate the range of issues:
 The use of a long-term mooring on a canal for the ‘parking’ and/or maintenance of a vessel between cruises will not usually require planning permission as such an activity is ordinarily ancillary or incidental to the use of the canal for navigation14. That will be so even if the vessel at the mooring is occasionally used for overnight stays.
 Where, however, a vessel or floating structure (a) does not cruise or is incapable of cruising and (b) is used for residential purposes as a person’s sole or main residence, many local planning authorities will regard it as being materially different in nature or character from any previous non-residential use of the planning unit and/or, where appropriate, as having actually created a new planning unit. In such circumstances, it is likely that planning permission will be required for the residential use of the mooring.
 More difficult may be the situation where a vessel is used for residential purposes, as a person’s sole or main residence, but does cruise regularly between stays amounting to more than 28 days at its mooring base. Whether there has been a material change of use in the location of the mooring will be a matter of fact and degree having regard to the planning unit and the nature or character of the previous and existing use.
 Also more difficult is where a small number of vessels are used for residential purposes within a larger site of leisure moorings. Here the residential use may be difficult to distinguish from the leisure use, and the scale of environmental impact may be marginal in relation to the existing level of activity at the site or within the planning unit.

 

Guidance -

 

Type of Residential use :

Residential use of a vessel at a designated location in winter but which continuously cruises in summer (i.e. seasonal cruisers).

 

Need For Planning permission :
On case by case basis

 

Commentary :
Planning permission may be required for any stay at a mooring longer than 28 days in any calendar year*.

 

*This is where the C&RT Winter Moorings may actually contravene the law

 

It is interesting that BWML do not limit the nights on board throughout the year EXCEPT to say that you must either leave the boat, or the boat leave the marina one night per month if you are a 'heavy user' on a leisure mooring. This obviously does not apply to those on residential moorings.

 

3.1.5 Failure to obtain planning permission: Planning Enforcement
A mooring operator should always make clear to the boater, as part of the mooring agreement, the planning designation of the mooring (and hence the permitted use) and that they are responsible for complying with local authority planning requirements.
Where the local planning authority believes there is unauthorised residential use and there has been a breach of planning control, either by the carrying out of development without planning permission or the carrying out of development in breach of a planning condition, they may consider it ‘expedient’ to commence enforcement proceedings. The relevant powers are set out in Part VII of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
A number of parties may become involved in resolving cases of unauthorised residential use of moorings:
 The local planning authority;
 The mooring operator (in some cases, this might be the navigation authority);
 The navigation authority (where there are navigational issues);
 The occupier of the houseboat or floating structure; and
 The local authority as housing and environmental health authority.
The local planning authority should first contact the mooring operator, if necessary through the navigation authority, in order to seek to resolve the issue. They may serve a planning enforcement notice upon the owner or occupier of the land and on any other person having an interest in the land, which may include the occupier of the vessel or structure, the mooring operator, the landowner and the navigation authority, requiring the unauthorised use to cease.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Alan de Enfield

[Momac]

1 hour ago, Jess-- said:

that would catch out people like me...

I have a leisure mooring in a marina and do not live on the boat (I think I have spent 4 nights in the marina in 3 years).

However I cannot produce a council tax bill in my name (it's in my partners name along with the electric bill)
Phone bills (2 landline & 2 mobiles) are all in company names

 

What I could produce are mortgage statements etc but none of them would prove that I live at the address

 

A good point .

But then you have nothing to fear as you are not defrauding the government by avoiding a contribution to council tax one way or another through your usual household arrangements with your partner.

 People who evade tax of any sort  risk being back charged over however many years can be proven if they are caught. Once in court lying to a judge  is not a viable option unless prison is considered desirable.

[Momac]

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Commentary :
Planning permission may be required for any stay at a mooring longer than 28 days in any calendar year*.

 

*This is where the C&RT Winter Moorings may actually contravene the law

That is a pretty clear definition.

It does say ''may be required''. I think this is to avoid penalty to people who might use the boat as a weekend holiday home and could well stay in the marina more than 28 days in a year . But it is intended to catch people who are living on the boat  and have no other residence.

 

 

 

[Machpoint005]

How would they assess a boat for council tax? Is it just automatically band A?

[Alan de Enfield]

10 minutes ago, Machpoint005 said:

How would they assess a boat for council tax? Is it just automatically band A?

Generally it is the mooring that is 'valued' as a boat is NORMALLY a Chattel. The council tax you pay is based on the value of the mooring NOT the value of the boat. A mooring in London could be valued at £200,000 and have a £10,000 boat on it. The council tax would (normally) be based on the £200,000 band.

 

Do a VOA Search for "Practice Notes 7" where it breaks down how and when the boat value will be added to the mooring value.

 

There are pages and pages of it, but here is a tate :

 

3.2 The Rating (Caravan and Boats) Act 1996 amends Section 66(3) & (4) with effect from 1 April 1990 so as to clarify when a caravan pitch or a boat mooring comprises domestic property. A copy of the relevant sections of the Act is attached to this Practice Note as Appendix 1.

Broadly, a caravan pitch or boat mooring is domestic property when either:

• is occupied by a caravan or boat that is a sole or main residence of an individual, and therefore treated as a dwelling; or
• is an appurtenance enjoyed with other living accommodation (which is itself a dwelling) and is not a separate hereditament.
• a constructed or established pitch or mooring becomes occupied by a boat or caravan used as a sole or main residence, then the pitch or mooring will constitute domestic property ie a dwelling from that date.

3.3 Caravan pitches and boat moorings which when next in use will be domestic property

S.66(5) of the LGFA 1988 provides that, “Property not in use is domestic if it appears that when next in use it will be domestic” Therefore a pitch or mooring which has no caravan or boat situated on it will not constitute domestic property, unless:

• it forms part of a larger hereditament which itself is domestic property i.e. house and grounds

• it is clear that when next in use this will be as the pitch for a caravan, or mooring for a boat, which is a sole or main residence.

The most obvious instances when this is likely to occur are in the cases of marina and canal bank moorings occupied by mobile residential boats, a showman’s winter quarters or a gypsy caravan site.

If a caravan and pitch which has been occupied as a sole or main residence becomes unoccupied it will nevertheless continue to be classed as domestic property (and therefore a dwelling) if, when next in use, it will form the sole or main residence of an individual. Accordingly, where a caravan sited on a residential caravan park is vacated and placed on the market for sale the entry should usually remain shown in the Council Tax Valuation List. The same will apply to mobile residential boats sold on their moorings when the status of domestic/non domestic property may need to be re-examined.

It is not considered that a caravan brought to a pitch or a boat to a mooring should be regarded as a dwelling unless it is clear that its use will be as a sole or main residence. If not a sole or main residence, the property should be regarded as non-domestic and liable to be included as a separate hereditament in the rating list or as part of a larger hereditament.

 

6. Whether the value of the caravan or boat is to be included with the mooring in the Council Tax Valuation for Banding Purposes

6.1 Technically the boat or caravan is a chattel which will only become part of the hereditament if its presence has a sufficient degree of permanence to the land.

6.2 In London County Council v Wilkins (VO) 1954 (HL) the question of whether a chattel was rateable was considered. Lord Kilmur said that the test of rateability was whether there is evidence that the structures were enjoyed with the land and enhanced its value. He concluded that, “A chattel to be rateable must be rateable with the land on which it rests”.

6.3 The rateability of a caravan was specifically considered in Field Place Caravan Park Ltd v Harding (VO) 1966 (CA) when Lord Denning said,

“Although a chattel is not a rateable hereditament by itself, nevertheless it may become rateable together with land, if it is placed on a piece of land and enjoyed with it in such circumstances and with such a degree of permanence that the chattel with the land can together be regarded as one unit of occupation.”

Edited November 5, 2018 by Alan de Enfield

[Cheshire cat]

Interesting discussion. Our Marina is currently full and will be until the end of March. CC'ers over wintering so I guess a good proportion will be resident on their boat for the duration.

[koukouvagia]

Sorry if this is slightly off topic.

CaRT has now started to add a 1% surcharge on mooring fees at our site.  In order not to be charged I am obliged to send a copy of my Council Tax Bill. (Very inconvenient if all transactions with the local council are done online). In other words, CaRT assumes that all long term leisure moorers are living on their boats unless we can prove otherwise.

 

Is this a widespread innovation?

 

There is no indication on the invoice whether this surcharge has been added or not. In fact, it’s automatically added and you have to inform CaRT if you do not live on board. I suspect some moorers just assume the increase in fees is merely the annual rise and don’t challenge the invoice.

 

I object strongly to having to provide this evidence every year.  However, after complaining I am now told that this will no longer be necessary.

 

A lot of the information on a Council Tax demand is confidential so I redacted everything except the address - which CaRT already has.

[Alan de Enfield]

37 minutes ago, koukouvagia said:

Sorry if this is slightly off topic.

CaRT has now started to add a 1% surcharge on mooring fees at our site.  In order not to be charged I am obliged to send a copy of my Council Tax Bill. (Very inconvenient if all transactions with the local council are done online). In other words, CaRT assumes that all long term leisure moorers are living on their boats unless we can prove otherwise.

 

Is this a widespread innovation?

 

There is no indication on the invoice whether this surcharge has been added or not. In fact, it’s automatically added and you have to inform CaRT if you do not live on board. I suspect some moorers just assume the increase in fees is merely the annual rise and don’t challenge the invoice.

 

I object strongly to having to provide this evidence every year.  However, after complaining I am now told that this will no longer be necessary.

 

A lot of the information on a Council Tax demand is confidential so I redacted everything except the address - which CaRT already has.

That sounds like a worrying trend.

And pretty much mirrors the BWML system - you want a leisure mooring - show a council tax bill.

No council tax bill, you pay residential mooring rates.

[Arthur Marshall]

40 minutes ago, koukouvagia said:

Sorry if this is slightly off topic.

CaRT has now started to add a 1% surcharge on mooring fees at our site.  In order not to be charged I am obliged to send a copy of my Council Tax Bill. (Very inconvenient if all transactions with the local council are done online). In other words, CaRT assumes that all long term leisure moorers are living on their boats unless we can prove otherwise.

 

Presumably this is a CRT mooring site.  I don't recall seeing it on my farm EOG mooring this year, but will keep an eye out next year.  Did you get any information in advance they were doing this?  Can't remember seeing it in a Boater's Update (maybe not surprisingly).

[koukouvagia]

3 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Presumably this is a CRT mooring site.  I don't recall seeing it on my farm EOG mooring this year, but will keep an eye out next year.  Did you get any information in advance they were doing this?  Can't remember seeing it in a Boater's Update (maybe not surprisingly).

Yes, it is a CaRT site.  Yes, I did get a letter two years ago.  However, speaking to fellow moorers, some have either forgotten about any letter or never received one or have omitted to supply the Council Tax Bill.  (I must ask a new moorer if he's been told about this). 

 

 

[doratheexplorer]

18 hours ago, nbfiresprite said:

The smart councils simply zone marina berths for council tax, if the berth holder cannot produce council tax bill in their name.

This seems very unsatisfactory to me.  Many adults live quite legally in properties where the council tax payer is someone else.  Grown up kids still living at home.  Shared houses.  New partners etc.

 

[doratheexplorer]

1 hour ago, koukouvagia said:

Sorry if this is slightly off topic.

CaRT has now started to add a 1% surcharge on mooring fees at our site.  In order not to be charged I am obliged to send a copy of my Council Tax Bill. (Very inconvenient if all transactions with the local council are done online). In other words, CaRT assumes that all long term leisure moorers are living on their boats unless we can prove otherwise.

 

Is this a widespread innovation?

 

There is no indication on the invoice whether this surcharge has been added or not. In fact, it’s automatically added and you have to inform CaRT if you do not live on board. I suspect some moorers just assume the increase in fees is merely the annual rise and don’t challenge the invoice.

 

I object strongly to having to provide this evidence every year.  However, after complaining I am now told that this will no longer be necessary.

 

A lot of the information on a Council Tax demand is confidential so I redacted everything except the address - which CaRT already has.

That is shocking!  Have they given any justification?  Do you have anything written you can share with the forum.

[Machpoint005]

2 hours ago, koukouvagia said:

a copy of my Council Tax Bill. (Very inconvenient if all transactions with the local council are done online)

Can you send an electronic document to CRT by email? If no paper copy exists it would seem reasonable to expect them to accept it.

 

17 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Generally it is the mooring that is 'valued' as a boat is NORMALLY a Chattel. The council tax you pay is based on the value of the mooring NOT the value of the boat. A mooring in London could be valued at £200,000 and have a £10,000 boat on it. The council tax would (normally) be based on the £200,000 band.

 

Thanks - that's something I've learnt today, Unfortunately, it will get filed under "useless knowledge" for now, although others will find it much more relevant.

[Detling]

1 hour ago, doratheexplorer said:

That is shocking!  Have they given any justification?  Do you have anything written you can share with the forum.

Cash strapped councils are looking to raise revenue. The alternative of the council applying band A by default to every mooring on the canal system is far more shocking! The marina's seem to be trying to find other ways of keeping the council tax man at bay.

[Phil.]

3 minutes ago, Detling said:

Cash strapped councils are looking to raise revenue. The alternative of the council applying band A by default to every mooring on the canal system is far more shocking! The marina's seem to be trying to find other ways of keeping the council tax man at bay.

There would be no legal basis for councils to do that. The problem is by demanding something that is not legally required, it soon becomes the norm and is then more difficult to avoid.

[doratheexplorer]

8 minutes ago, Detling said:

Cash strapped councils are looking to raise revenue. The alternative of the council applying band A by default to every mooring on the canal system is far more shocking! The marina's seem to be trying to find other ways of keeping the council tax man at bay.

That doesn't make sense.  Levying an extra charge on moorers by CRT doesn't have anything to do with council tax or marinas (except very indirectly).  This is extra money for CRT without justification.

[Phil Ambrose]

Interesting to read this thread with so many different opinions. all insisting they are right so I thought I would throw this in just to add to the range of "options" available.

My marina is on EA waters, it's on a private island and we pay NO council tax and yes some residents claim housing benefit.

It seems that it's all a lottery.

Phil 

[canalworld]

3 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

That sounds like a worrying trend.

And pretty much mirrors the BWML system - you want a leisure mooring - show a council tax bill.

No council tax bill, you pay residential mooring rates.

I'd like a residential mooring and happily pay for one, I have a leisure mooring as that's what was available, it appears that without a council tax bill I couldn't have got a mooring at all - clearly it's a planning issue, but there appears to be lots of demand for residential moorings and no particularly obvious reason why it shouldn't be a fairly simple planning decision to create more in the area I'm in where tens of thousands of new houses are being built to cope with demand (which I suspect is fairly similar to lots of other areas). I'm fairly sure I'm not the only person resident on a leisure mooring where I am - though there's a fair chance I might actually comply with the terms of the BWML agreement, I have so far by going out cruising or spending time away camping or nights round at friends (if I had a girlfriend and spent a night at hers once a week it seems that would appear to make me compliant!)

3 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

This seems very unsatisfactory to me.  Many adults live quite legally in properties where the council tax payer is someone else.  Grown up kids still living at home.  Shared houses.  New partners etc.

 

Indeed - I had a copy of the council tax bill to show when I got my mooring, however that was from the previous address I lived at - where I was living at the time I wasn't on the bill. I currently have an "official" address where I'm not on the council tax bill either, at a friend's place just up the road where there are already 2 adults living (so it makes no difference to council tax payments - I can't see how it makes any difference to the council whether I live at that house or on the boat). Is there no other means of providing proof of residence to CaRT in the way that BWML allow alternative evidence (will be testing that one soon assuming they need something at renewal...)

 

I appear to be the first person actually in this situation to have raised my head - already a member on here, but name changed (I find it amusing that my new name was available!) and being careful how much detail I give for reasons. Don't feel particularly guilty given I'm paying the same amount of council tax I was at my previous address (or if I lived at my "official" address), that I'd take a residential mooring if I could get one and that whilst the main reason for choosing to live on a boat was "a cheap flat" I've always been into boating and owning a narrowboat was something that appealed and I'd already discussed with friends - everybody seems to think it's something which suits me - and I do regularly go out cruising, I'm enjoying living on a boat for all the right reasons (I'd happily CC legitimately if circumstances where different).

Edited November 6, 2018 by canalworld

[doratheexplorer]

16 minutes ago, canalworld said:

 

Indeed - I had a copy of the council tax bill to show when I got my mooring, however that was from the previous address I lived at - where I was living at the time I wasn't on the bill. I currently have an "official" address where I'm not on the council tax bill either, at a friend's place just up the road where there are already 2 adults living (so it makes no difference to council tax payments - I can't see how it makes any difference to the council whether I live at that house or on the boat). Is there no other means of providing proof of residence to CaRT in the way that BWML allow alternative evidence (will be testing that one soon assuming they need something at renewal...)

 

I appear to be the first person actually in this situation to have raised my head - already a member on here, but name changed (I find it amusing that my new name was available!) and being careful how much detail I give for reasons. Don't feel particularly guilty given I'm paying the same amount of council tax I was at my previous address (or if I lived at my "official" address), that I'd take a residential mooring if I could get one and that whilst the main reason for choosing to live on a boat was "a cheap flat" I've always been into boating and owning a narrowboat was something that appealed and I'd already discussed with friends - everybody seems to think it's something which suits me - and I do regularly go out cruising, I'm enjoying living on a boat for all the right reasons (I'd happily CC legitimately if circumstances where different).

I wasn;t really talking about people in your situation.  There is an argument that you should be contributing to the coffers of the local authority where your mooring is.  I was talking about people who don't live on their boats and aren't on the council tax bill in their house either.  Why should they be forced to contribute more?

[koukouvagia]

4 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

That is shocking!  Have they given any justification?  Do you have anything written you can share with the forum.

The wording on the letter I received in 2016 announcing that my mooring fees would have a 1% surcharge is quite clever.

"The increase above inflation reflects the popularity of this site and the fact although the site has leisure status, it is extensively utilised for more than pure leisure use.  A site with full residential permission would attract far higher rates."

This increase is justified thus: "Increase (sic) leisure use puts additional pressure on local facilities as well as the site itself."

 

This seems to me to imply that as far as CaRT is concerned there are three types of mooring : leisure, residential and extensively used.

When I queried this I was asked to supply my Council Tax bill to prove that I was not extensively using the mooring.  The surcharge was then removed.  

 

 

[Momac]

7 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

This seems very unsatisfactory to me.  Many adults live quite legally in properties where the council tax payer is someone else.  Grown up kids still living at home.  Shared houses.  New partners etc.

In which case it would not be difficult for the boat owner to obtain a copy of the council tax bill from the owner of the house . Th boat owner and house owner will know each other very well  and in most cases will presumably be related even if not by marriage.  An explanation why the name on the council tax bill is not the boat owners name may honestly be given . If the boat owner genuinely lives at that address then all is well and everyone is happy.

 

If there is a suspected deception then the matter might be investigated .Personally  I would not take that risk.

 

[Cheshire cat]

2 hours ago, koukouvagia said:

The wording on the letter I received in 2016 announcing that my mooring fees would have a 1% surcharge is quite clever.

"The increase above inflation reflects the popularity of this site and the fact although the site has leisure status, it is extensively utilised for more than pure leisure use.  A site with full residential permission would attract far higher rates."

This increase is justified thus: "Increase (sic) leisure use puts additional pressure on local facilities as well as the site itself."

 

This seems to me to imply that as far as CaRT is concerned there are three types of mooring : leisure, residential and extensively used.

When I queried this I was asked to supply my Council Tax bill to prove that I was not extensively using the mooring.  The surcharge was then removed.  

 

 

I vaguely recall something similar for Kings Bromley Marina. Something along the lines of if you spent more than 21 nights on board in any one year there would be a surcharge. Not sure if this ever got implemented and whether it was policy of the current owners but I think it was discussed on here at the time.

[Tanglewood]

3 hours ago, doratheexplorer said:

There is an argument that you should be contributing to the coffers of the local authority where your mooring is. 

Not only is there an argument - in my view there ought to be an obligation.  At the very least any responsible citizen ought to accept that in this country, we expect everyone to pay in so that all may enjoy the services that are provided. It is simply the way it works.  Some folk do not have children but they contribute to schools, some people are spared the affliction that is mental illness, but all pay for mental health services.  Those who do not pay for the services provided by Local Authorities benefit - even if they do not realise or value what is provided.  Those who do not contribute are benefit cheats. 

[Machpoint005]

16 minutes ago, Tanglewood said:

Some folk do not have children but they contribute to schools

They still benefit from other people's children going to school. 

[Cheshire cat]

Yes, found this in the terms and conditions of Castle Marinas

 

28. Occupation of Vessels

 

• 28.1 With the exception of Vessels moored at Nottingham Castle Marina, the Owner shall not live permanently on board the Vessel nor shall they encourage or permit anyone else to do so, without the prior written permission of the Company.
• 28.2 The Company reserve the right to seek confirmation from the Owners who have purchased a leisure mooring that they are using the mooring in accordance with the Contract and not using the Marina for residential purposes.
• 28.3 Where appropriate, the Company reserves the right to transfer the Vessel’s mooring to a different Grade, including a residential mooring grade and to charge the Owner the difference in mooring fees at any point during the Contract or upon renewal of the contract if it considers that the Owner is using the Marina for residential purposes.

It then goes on to talk about passing on Council Tax if levied by the council which seems fair enough.

 

It would be interesting to know if this has ever been invoked and what the other types of contract other than leisure or resedential there are

 

Perhaps Ditchcrawler has some insight. He moored there for some time although I got the impression he rarely spent more than a single night tied up in the marina.